Been having a think about what red posted about a simple guide to how we have ended up in the current situation regarding our sport.
I'll try keep it simple, no letters, no latin just basic facts.
For simplicity you can split our shoreline into two regions, Low water out to 12 miles, and 12 miles out to 200 miles.
The 12 - 200 mile region is run by the EU and as such we have little say in what happens out there. Its policed by the fisheries protection, an off shoot of the navy. Not really of intrest to anglers apart from the fact that if it is overfished it will eventualy reflect in catches inshore.
The Low Water to 12 Mile Section.
This is the area most of intrest to anglers. It is run and policed by sea fisheries committees of which there are 12 in the UK and Wales.
Sea fisheries committees were set up in 1890 to look after the intrests of commercial fishermen and apart from the addition of 2 angling representatives to each committee around 5 years ago they have remained very much unchanged. The last major update of the regulations they work to was in the late sixties. This means many of the procedures and regulations are well out of date. There is a minefield of different laws for different boats and unfortunately the laws differ from region to region...there is no consistency through neighouring regions. Not suprising since these were set up over a century ago.
The biggest downside to this management system is it is very old fashioned and very slow to react. The commitees are funded by the local councils not central government, which worked fine when everyone in the coastal towns and villages earned their living from the sea. Nowadays councils will cut costs where they can. ( I started put put in personal comments but will leave them out)
Now we come to the busy bit with lots happening.
A report was commissioned by defra about 4 years ago called "the net benifits report" which looked at all aspects of the uses of our seas in an effort to ensure they are used sustainably. This recommended many changes of which one was that anglers (and others)should be considered as stakeholders. The prime ministers written response to this report backed the majority of the proposals in the report.
Around the same time anglers started to campaign for the increase in the minimum landing size of bass which became known as the bass management plan and part of their plan was to point out exactly how many anglers there are and how much more they are worth to the economy than commercial fishing. A study was commisioned into the value of anglers to the uk which arrived at a figure of 587 million ( I think) now refered to as the Drew Report. Also during the meetings with defra the introduction of licenses and bag limits came up and people in general agreed that if the size limit went up they would be happy to pay for licenses and most already fished to a self impossed bag limit.
The logic behind the introduction of both these was to reduce the illegal fishing for bass which invariable end up been sold at the back door of restaurants. It must be pointed out that at the time they were only speaking up for bass but this was eventually to be taken up by defra and proposed for introduction to us all.
Defra.
Department of the Enviroment, Fisheries and Rural Affairs,
Where do they come into it? The sea fisheries committees in theory make the bylaws, propose them to defra who put them infront of government ministers with a recommendation. He signs on the bottom line ( at the moment that guy is John Shaw ) It becomes a law.
Easy to write down but a very longwinded process which very often makes changes after the problem is long over.
As part of the efforts of those promoting the bass management plan Defra began to speak to anglers seriously and (appear) to take note. When new legisation was proposed it went to more and more consultees each time. Anglers were finally having there say but to date there has still been no national law changed to benifit anglers however there have been local successes such as the tope bylaw in the North East Sea Fisheries Region.
As an example of how ludricrous the current legislation is in terms of protecting our fish...if a trawler leaves hartlepool and catches a Tope. He lands it at shouth shileds or sunderland...he is breaking the law...If he lands it at north shields...that fine and it can be sold! This regional difference needs clearing up. Another example I saw recently was a trawler landing cod at Sunderland when I was lead to believe the quota was full. Turns out its a boat owned by a Scottish Producer Organisation who still had quota left so it was legal. Yet the local boats could not land cod.
Marine Bill White Paper.
We have all heard it mentioned. We know it mentions a license, bag limits and bait digging. But what is it.
This is Defra's suggestions for tackling the issues and problems highlighted by the Net Benifits report. Its a huge document 160+ a4 pages. It covers everything from dredging, building new marina's, gravel extraction down to charging anglers for licenses.
One of the biggest sections is related to reforming the sea fisheries committee's. Last done in 1967 and long overdue. Change of name, number of them but most importantly to update the way they are funded and speed up the system so they can react faster to local needs. They also have to accept that others have a right to use the seas and react accordingly, no longer will they be looking after the commercials intrests.
Also included is the proposal to charge anglers for a license and bag limits...its all been discussed elsewhere.
Not included as far as I can see is a proposal to ban bait digging...what is included is to change the jurisdiction of SFC's to include up to the high water mark. This takes responsibility off the local councils. It will affect management of the foreshore but will not mean a ban on bait digging.
Marine Protected Area's (MPA's) and No Take Zones (NTZ's)
Both of these do not necessarily mean that we wont be allowed to fish there. Angling is recognised as an enviromentaly friendly use of the sea. The marine bill covers the company wanting to drill for oil, drag 20 tonnes of chains across a coral reef, build a wind farm or excavate an amount of gravel the size of the Isle of man to build another runway somewhere. It doesn't just apply to anglers and if large areas are left undisturbed we could see a few benifits.
No Take zones are exactly what it says on the tin...catch it but put it back without harming the enviroment. A practice common in other areas for some species. It does not necessarily mean no fishing.
The marine bill is not a law it just puts in place the means to create laws as and when they become necessary. The best way to regard it is as a list of things we would like to change.
The marine bill will be debated in the current session of parliament and has widespread support from many organisations simply because it addresses many of the problems we are suffering due to outdated legislation. Each item there will be debated and consulted on before it actually becomes law.
Finally this RSA Consultation,
For defra this is quite a short one...only 25 pages. This is a request by defra for more input from anglers. They are asking for feedback from the guys on the beaches and the piers and not just those who turn up to committee meetings in London.
Its easy to say that the NFSA,sacn, bass ,sos etc dont represent us the masses. This is the masses chance to make their comments known. Defra are going out of their way to contact as many anglers as possible so they can have their say.
DONT MISS THE CHANCE...HAVE YOUR SAY.
For the record the suggestions/questions in the rsa consultations were made by a combination of Defra, a working committee of commercials and a working committee of anglers. At this stage I cant remember the letters naming the committee.
This is a list of changes that are proposed to modernise a 120 year old system, yes its far reaching, but by bringing legislation in line with modern technology it should mean the laws can ensure the seas can sustain ALL users demands on them
Please dont shout at me for inaccuracies here...I kept it vague/easy to follow...If there are any major errors in what I have put please let me know and I will edit it.
Another item not mentioned in the RSA consultation is the calls for a "Golden Mile"...basically 1 mile of no trawling from low water out to sea. There is no reason why you could not demand it be considered in any future proposals.
There were many occassions where I wanted to put my own personal comments in , especially as a SFC member who is rapidly learning the failings of this particular system of management of what you and I catch ( there I go again)
Cheers
Dave
